1. Northrup JM, Wittemyer G. Characterising the impacts of emerging energy development on wildlife, with an eye towards mitigation. Ecol Lett. 2013;16: 112–125.
2. Williams JM. The hydropower myth. Environ Sci Pollut Res. 2019. doi:10.1007/s11356-019-04657-6
3. Brown C, Zakaria V, Joubert A, Rafique M, Murad J, King J, et al. Achieving an environmentally sustainable outcome for the Gulpur hydropower project in the Poonch River Mahaseer National Park, Pakistan. Sustain Water Resour Manag. 2019;5: 611–628. doi:10.1007/s40899-018-0227-7
4. Alley KD, Hile R, Mitra C. Visualizing hydropower across the Himalayas: Mapping in a time of regulatory decline. HIMALAYA, J Assoc Nepal Himal Stud. 2014;34: 52–66.
5. Huber A. Hydropower in the Himalayan hazardscape: Strategic ignorance and the production of unequal risk. Water. 2019;11: 414.
6. Chandy T, Keenan RJ, Petheram RJ, Shepherd P. Impacts of Hydropower Development on Rural Livelihood Sustainability in Sikkim, India: Community Perceptions. Mt Res Dev. 2012;32: 117–125. doi:10.1659/MRD-JOURNAL-D-11-00103.1
7. Sharma RH, Awal R. Hydropower development in Nepal. Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 2013;21: 684–693. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2013.01.013
8. Couto TBA, Olden JD. Global proliferation of small hydropower plants – science and policy. Front Ecol Environ. 2018;16: 91–100. doi:10.1002/fee.1746
9. Zarfl C, Lumsdon AE, Berlekamp J, Tydecks L, Tockner K. A global boom in hydropower dam construction. Aquat Sci. 2015;77: 161–170. doi:10.1007/s00027-014-0377-0
10. Grill G, Lehner B, Thieme M, Geenen B, Tickner D, Antonelli F, et al. Mapping the world’s free-flowing rivers. Nature. 2019;569: 215–221. doi:10.1038/s41586-019-1111-9
11. Ziv G, Baran E, Nam S, Rodríguez-Iturbe I, Levin SA. Trading-off fish biodiversity, food security, and hydropower in the Mekong River Basin. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2012;109: 5609 LP – 5614. doi:10.1073/pnas.1201423109
12. Winemiller KO, McIntyre PB, Castello L, Fluet-Chouinard E, Giarrizzo T, Nam S, et al. Balancing hydropower and biodiversity in the Amazon, Congo, and Mekong. Science (80- ). 2016;351: 128 LP – 129. doi:10.1126/science.aac7082
13. Jumani S, Rao S, Machado S, Prakash A. Big concerns with small projects: Evaluating the socio-ecological impacts of small hydropower projects in India. Ambio. 2017;46: 500–511. doi:10.1007/s13280-016-0855-9
14. Anderson EP, Jenkins CN, Heilpern S, Maldonado-Ocampo JA, Carvajal-Vallejos FM, Encalada AC, et al. Fragmentation of Andes-to-Amazon connectivity by hydropower dams. Sci Adv. 2018;4: eaao1642. doi:10.1126/sciadv.aao1642
15. Finer M, Jenkins CN. Proliferation of Hydroelectric Dams in the Andean Amazon and Implications for Andes-Amazon Connectivity. PLoS One. 2012;7: e35126. Available: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0035126
16. Grumbine RE, Pandit MK. Threats from India’s Himalaya dams. Science (80- ). 2013;339: 36–37. doi:10.1126/science.1227211
17. Lees AC, Peres CA, Fearnside PM, Schneider M, Zuanon JAS. Hydropower and the future of Amazonian biodiversity. Biodivers Conserv. 2016;25: 451–466. doi:10.1007/s10531-016-1072-3
18. Mcallister DE, Craig JF, Davidson N, Delany S, Seddon M. Biodiversity Impacts of Large Dams. Background Paper Nr. 1. Int Union Conserv Nat Nat Resour United Nations Environ Program. 2001; 1–63.
19. Pandit MK, Grumbine RE. Potential Effects of Ongoing and Proposed Hydropower Development on Terrestrial Biological Diversity in the Indian Himalaya. Conserv Biol. 2012;26: 1061–1071. doi:10.1111/j.1523-1739.2012.01918.x
20. Jolli V. Hydro Power Development and Its Impacts on the Habitats and Diversity of Montane Birds of Western Himalayas. Vestn Zool. 2017;51: 311–324.
21. Mahoney SP, Schaefer JA. Hydroelectric development and the disruption of migration in caribou. Biol Conserv. 2002;107: 147–153. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/S0006-3207(02)00052-6
22. Gracey EO, Verones F. Impacts from hydropower production on biodiversity in an LCA framework—review and recommendations. Int J Life Cycle Assess. 2016;21: 412–428. doi:10.1007/s11367-016-1039-3
23. Alamgir M, Campbell MJ, Sloan S, Suhardiman A, Supriatna J, Laurance WF. High-risk infrastructure projects pose imminent threats to forests in Indonesian Borneo. Sci Rep. 2019;9: 140. doi:10.1038/s41598-018-36594-8
24. Benítez-López A, Alkemade R, Verweij PA. The impacts of roads and other infrastructure on mammal and bird populations: A meta-analysis. Biol Conserv. 2010;143: 1307–1316. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2010.02.009
25. Nellemann C, Cameron RD. Cumulative impacts of an evolving oil-field complex on the distribution of calving caribou. Can J Zool. 1998;76: 1425–1430. doi:10.1139/z98-078
26. Nellemann C, Kullerud L, Vistnes I, Forbes B. GLOBIO global methodology for mapping human impacts on the biosphere: the Arctic 2050 scenario and global application. UNEP. DEWA Technical Report 3; 2001.
27. Torres A, Jaeger JAG, Alonso JC. Assessing large-scale wildlife responses to human infrastructure development. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2016;113: 8472 LP – 8477. doi:10.1073/pnas.1522488113
28. Vistnes I, Nellemann C. Avoidance of Cabins, Roads, and Power Lines by Reindeer during Calving. J Wildl Manage. 2001;65: 915–925. doi:10.2307/3803040
29. WECS. Electricity Demand Forecast Report (2015-2040). Water Energy Comm Secr. Kathmandu; 2017.
30. Ghimire HR, Phuyal S, Singh NR. Environmental Compliance of Hydropower Projects in Nepal. Environ Challenges. 2021;5: 100307. doi:10.1016/j.envc.2021.100307
31. Benchimol M, Peres CA. Predicting local extinctions of Amazonian vertebrates in forest islands created by a mega dam. Biol Conserv. 2015;187: 61–72. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2015.04.005
32. McManamay RA, Samu N, Kao S-C, Bevelhimer MS, Hetrick SC. A Multi-scale Spatial Approach to Address Environmental Effects of Small Hydropower Development. Environ Manage. 2015;55: 217–243. doi:10.1007/s00267-014-0371-2
33. Bakken TH, Aase AG, Hagen D, Sundt H, Barton DN, Lujala P. Demonstrating a new framework for the comparison of environmental impacts from small- and large-scale hydropower and wind power projects. J Environ Manage. 2014;140: 93–101. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2014.01.050
34. Bhuju UR, Shakya PR, Basnet TB, Shrestha S. Nepal biodiversity resource book: protected areas, Ramsar sites, and World Heritage sites. International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD); 2007.
35. DNPWC. Annual report of 2073/74 (B.S.). Kathmandu; 2017.
36. Chaudhary RP. Forest conservation and environmental management in Nepal: a review. Biodivers Conserv. 2000;9: 1235–1260. doi:10.1023/A:1008900216876
37. Hunter Jr. ML, Yonzon P. Altitudinal Distributions of Birds, Mammals, People, Forests, and Parks in Nepal. Conserv Biol. 1993;7: 420–423. doi:10.1046/j.1523-1739.1993.07020420.x
38. CBS. Nepal in Figures. Kathmandu; 2014.
39. Myers N, Mittermeier RA, Mittermeier CG, da Fonseca GAB, Kent J. Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature. 2000;403: 853–858. doi:10.1038/35002501
40. Anderson EP, Pringle CM, Freeman MC. Quantifying the extent of river fragmentation by hydropower dams in the Sarapiquí River Basin, Costa Rica. Aquat Conserv Mar Freshw Ecosyst. 2008;18: 408–417. doi:10.1002/aqc.882
41. Kibler KM, Tullos DD. Cumulative biophysical impact of small and large hydropower development in Nu River, China. Water Resour Res. 2013;49: 3104–3118. doi:10.1002/wrcr.20243
42. Bakken TH, Sundt H, Ruud A, Harby A. Development of Small Versus Large Hydropower in Norway– Comparison of Environmental Impacts. Energy Procedia. 2012;20: 185–199. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2012.03.019
43. Egré D, Milewski JC. The diversity of hydropower projects. Energy Policy. 2002;30: 1225–1230. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-4215(02)00083-6
44. Dursun B, Gokcol C. The role of hydroelectric power and contribution of small hydropower plants for sustainable development in Turkey. Renew Energy. 2011;36: 1227–1235. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2010.10.001
45. Rosenberg DM, Bodaly RA, Usher PJ. Environmental and social impacts of large scale hydroelectric development: who is listening? Glob Environ Chang. 1995;5: 127–148. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/0959-3780(95)00018-J
46. GoN. Environment Protection Regulation. Ministry of Population and Environment, Government of Nepal; 1997.
47. ESRI. ARCGIS Desktop, Release 10.3. Redlands, CA: Environmenatal System Research Institute; 2014.
48. Yap BW, Sim CH. Comparisons of various types of normality tests. J Stat Comput Simul. 2011;81: 2141–2155. doi:10.1080/00949655.2010.520163
49. Razali NM, Wah YB. Power comparisons of shapiro-wilk, kolmogorov-smirnov, lilliefors and anderson-darling tests. 2011.
50. Van Emden HF. Statistics for terrified biologists. John Wiley & Sons; 2019.
51. Hecke T Van. Power study of anova versus Kruskal-Wallis test. J Stat Manag Syst. 2012;15: 241–247. doi:10.1080/09720510.2012.10701623
52. Alho CJR. Environmental Effects of Hydropower Reservoirs on Wild Mammals and Freshwater Turtles in Amazonia: A Review. Oecologia Aust. 2011;15: 593–604. doi:10.4257/oeco.2011.1503.11
53. Eigenbrod F, Hecnar SJ, Fahrig L. Quantifying the Road-Effect Zone. Ecol Soc. 2009;14. Available: http://www.jstor.org/stable/26268024
54. Pandit MK, Manish K, Koh LP. Dancing on the Roof of the World: Ecological Transformation of the Himalayan Landscape. Bioscience. 2014;64: 980–992. doi:10.1093/biosci/biu152
55. Butchart SHM, Scharlemann JPW, Evans MI, Quader S, Aricò S, Arinaitwe J, et al. Protecting Important Sites for Biodiversity Contributes to Meeting Global Conservation Targets. PLoS One. 2012;7: e32529. Available: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0032529
56. Eken G, Bennun L, Brooks TM, Darwall W, Fishpool LDC, Foster M, et al. Key Biodiversity Areas as Site Conservation Targets. Bioscience. 2004;54: 1110–1118. doi:10.1641/0006-3568(2004)054[1110:KBAASC]2.0.CO;2
57. Gray CL, Hill SLL, Newbold T, Hudson LN, Börger L, Contu S, et al. Local biodiversity is higher inside than outside terrestrial protected areas worldwide. Nat Commun. 2016;7: 12306. doi:10.1038/ncomms12306
58. Jha CS, Goparaju L, Tripathi A, Gharai B, Raghubanshi AS, Singh JS. Forest fragmentation and its impact on species diversity: an analysis using remote sensing and GIS. Biodivers Conserv. 2005;14: 1681–1698. doi:10.1007/s10531-004-0695-y
59. Pandit MK, Sodhi NS, Koh LP, Bhaskar A, Brook BW. Unreported yet massive deforestation driving loss of endemic biodiversity in Indian Himalaya. Biodivers Conserv. 2007;16: 153–163. doi:10.1007/s10531-006-9038-5
60. Strassburg BBN, Kelly A, Balmford A, Davies RG, Gibbs HK, Lovett A, et al. Global congruence of carbon storage and biodiversity in terrestrial ecosystems. Conserv Lett. 2010;3: 98–105. doi:10.1111/j.1755-263X.2009.00092.x
61. Saunders DA, Hobbs RJ, Margules CR. Biological consequences of ecosystem fragmentation: a review. Conserv Biol. 1991;5: 18–32.
62. Palomino D, Carrascal LM. Threshold distances to nearby cities and roads influence the bird community of a mosaic landscape. Biol Conserv. 2007;140: 100–109. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2007.07.029
63. Butler C, Rest M. Calculating risk, denying uncertainty: Seismicity and hydropower development in Nepal. HIMALAYA, J Assoc Nepal Himal Stud. 2017;37: 6.
64. Hussain A, Sarangi GK, Pandit A, Ishaq S, Mamnun N, Ahmad B, et al. Hydropower development in the Hindu Kush Himalayan region: Issues, policies and opportunities. Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 2019;107: 446–461. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2019.03.010
65. Dincer I. Renewable energy and sustainable development: a crucial review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 2000;4: 157–175. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-0321(99)00011-8
66. Oelz S, Sims R, Kirchner N. Contribution of Renewables to Energy Security. Technology. Paris; 2007.
67. Gibson L, Wilman EN, Laurance WF. How Green is ‘Green’ Energy? Trends Ecol Evol. 2017;32: 922–935. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2017.09.007
68. Agrawal DK, Lodhi MS, Panwar S. Are EIA studies sufficient for projected hydropower development in the Indian Himalayan region? Curr Sci. 2010;98: 154–161. Available: http://www.jstor.org/stable/24111505
69. Bhatt RP, Khanal SN. Environmental impact assessment system in Nepal–An overview of policy, legal instruments and process. Kathmandu Univ J Sci Eng Technol. 2009;5: 2009.
70. Pinho P, Maia R, Monterroso A. The quality of Portuguese Environmental Impact Studies: The case of small hydropower projects. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 2007;27: 189–205. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2006.10.005
71. Erlewein A. Disappearing rivers — The limits of environmental assessment for hydropower in India. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 2013;43: 135–143. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2013.07.002
72. Cashmore M. The role of science in environmental impact assessment: process and procedure versus purpose in the development of theory. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 2004;24: 403–426. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2003.12.002
73. Muller M. Hydropower dams can help mitigate the global warming impact of wetlands. Nature. 2019: 315–317. doi:10.1038/d41586-019-00616-w